On 12/13/2010 2:17 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > On Mon, 13 Dec 2010 14:09:02 -0500 > Alexander Belopolsky<alexander.belopolsky at gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 11:54 AM, Guido van Rossum<guido at python.org> wrote: >>> I'm at least +0 on >>> allowing trailing commas in the situation the OP mentioned. >>> >> >> FWIW, I am also about +0.5 on allowing trailing comma. Note that in a >> similar situation, the C standardization committee has erred on the >> side of consistency: >> >> """ >> A new feature of C99: a common extension in many implementations >> allows a trailing comma after the list of enumeration constants. The >> Committee decided to adopt this feature as an innocuous extension that >> mirrors the trailing commas allowed in initializers. >> """ http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/C99RationaleV5.10.pdf >> >> Similarly, I find allowing trailing comma in keyword only arguments >> lists to be an innocuous extension that mirrors the trailing commas >> allowed in the positional arguments lists. > > +1 from me as well. Special cases are hard to remember. Same here. A strong +1 for a consistent rule (always or never allowed) with a +1 for always given others use case of one param/arg per line. So I think the issues should be reopened. -- Terry Jan Reedy
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4